Construct 3 Subscription Fee Or Buy (Pay Once) Vote

Neither.

It doesnt look like it improves enough for me to justify wanting or NEEDING it. Ill hold my tongue until it is released and I can actually see and try out whats new, or isnt.

that said, its a buy from me. Or im not using it. Ill use unity,unreal or gamemaker before I need to subscribe.

It is funny to discuss Subscription or Buy vote without knowing what we are paying for! What is the Construct 3 Free features and what is the Construct 3 Paid features, anyway ill spare my 2 cents on these, I'm willing to subscribe if they have any of these features or variations otherwise paid.

1. They have a cloud based export similar to cocoon.io https://cocoon.io/pricing — at least to their silver price point offer or of similar feature

2. or/ They have a decent sound effects / music asset library ready for use

3. or/ They have a kick ass templates for various games with decent level design

4. or/ Multiplayer service platform similar to unity https://unity3d.com/services/multiplayer

5. or/ <what features do you what to put price into> https://store.unity.com/

Buy.

I really liked the idea of personal and business licenses that you had for a lifetime, with constant updates being made.

I can sort of understand the yearly subscription's purpose (more income for Scirra), but as a hobby gamedev who doesn't really make bank from their own projects and not much income to dispose, it seems like an extra hurdle compared to a one-time fee.

BUY/(pay once for life time)

Keep personal/business licenses, get lifetime security/bug fixes for program until end of life (6 years?) and release a "new" version of Construct (3, 4, 5..) every 2/3/4 years that you have to pay* to "upgrade" to/keep getting "feature updates" perhaps.

*At discount for existing owners

i vote for 1 just for laugh

clickteam didn't listen and ashley had to leave and make his own engine so we have to do that => leave !

poignant.

I think it's ridiculous to be asking this question to the members, when it's not the community's decision. It's the business owners who make the business plans.

It's like me making a poll about "should C3 be $99 a month or a $1 one time payment". Obviously what most people would want is the one that benefits themselves and not the business more.

This rings like a business republican's answer.

Zebbi, haha nice.

Seriously though, it's not at all true to say that the consumer shouldn't be a factor in deciding the price.

'In 1st century BC, Publilius Syrus wrote: "Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it".' - https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Economics

This isn't businessman logic, this is idiot logic.

If people don't pay for Construct 3 when it's released with this subscription based model, Scirra won't make money at all. I realize Republicans can be ignorant, but if there is anything they understand, it's how to get what they want.

Buy.

Buy

Zebbi, haha nice.

Seriously though, it's not at all true to say that the consumer shouldn't be a factor in deciding the price.

'In 1st century BC, Publilius Syrus wrote: "Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it".' - https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Economics

This isn't businessman logic, this is idiot logic.

If people don't pay for Construct 3 when it's released with this subscription based model, Scirra won't make money at all. I realize Republicans can be ignorant, but if there is anything they understand, it's how to get what they want.

Yes, the post I quoted reminded me of these Christian conservatives that dislike open-source because it's taking food of the mouths of hard working Microsoft family men (not joking this was an actual blog I saw years ago).

People should be complaining about business decisions that are better for business and worse for the customer. As many have asked: what about this announcement was benefitting me and not the company?

I think it's ridiculous to be asking this question to the members, when it's not the community's decision. It's the business owners who make the business plans.

It's like me making a poll about "should C3 be $99 a month or a $1 one time payment". Obviously what most people would want is the one that benefits themselves and not the business more.

Yeah, this thread is useless but fun, I don't think it will change the mind of Scirra team, anyway the real game developer choose carefully which is engine is right for the job.

After of testing C3 in april, here comes the conclussion about C3 functionality and subscription model.

If they don't believe the clients are always right, their business is complete failure.

Otherwise, they are basically Apple's customers.

Buy!

I would much rather pay once. You'll probably lose my patronage and many others now, sorry Scirra. If you're going to charge subscription rates you'd better be hiring a bunch more coders, and actually listening to your customers, because from the synopsis of C3 so far it just seems like a bunch of stuff no one really asked for (I understand that sometimes this is necessary to innovate, but my point stands). Subscription model works well for a massive company such as Adobe as its an established industry standard, professionals worldwide rely on their software/services and pretty much no one else can touch them, but in the world of game creation software Scirra is just a blip on the radar - the majority of users are amateurs and won't want to pay for a subscription service. Sorry to sound so negative, I wish you guys the best but a subscription model is a kick in the teeth.

I think we're all just tired of being made to feel old fashioned if there's quite clearly a better and reliable solution that's available, but because it isn't bleeding edge tech or easy, they shove the blame back on us. We can say "native" all we want but they say "no no, the future is html5" well I'm sorry, it wasn't 5 years ago and it still isn't. We shouldn't even care what native is, it's just become a trite word to use in place of "can you actually write an exporter after 5 years, please?".

I mean, I want the platform movement to have solids disabled/enables per character, not globally for every object. Someone hacked the platform object to add a workout. Ashley claims we shouldn't be hacking stock behaviours and couldn't understand what I wanted that functionality for. I gave endless examples. Others did too. Absolutely no reply from that point on.

He still blames gpus for performance. He still claims html5 will be as good as native, but if anything it seems to be getting worse. There's no hit games using c2, the closest is rewriting it for performance improvement and because he can't port to console with c2.

And I quoted the bitwig thread that followed this exact same chain of events for hem to read. Where are the actual replies from scirra regarding this pr catastrophe?

At the moment, according to this vote, (7 subscriptions , 27 Buys) Scirra loses money with the subscription

Can they see this?